Artificial Limbo: The Moral Quandary of Frozen Embryos

7/12/2012

(Page 2 of 2)

where in vitro fertilization takes place." DP, 18.

Like the mother intent on infanticide in Seamus Heany's poem, those scientists and physicians as well as patients who participate in this mockery of procreation stand in moral shallows, ducking the issue. Their souls, like the wrists of the murderess in Heaney's poem, are "dead as the gravel." Their consciences have been torn open, rendered raw, as if a "minnow with hooks"--a fishing lure full of hooks--had been forcibly yanked out of the tender flesh of a woman's birth canal.

Were we to go to such cryopreservation facilities, we would be confronted with a veritable man-made limbo. Thousands upon thousands of human embryos--live human souls trapped in their tiny frozen "body" in strange-looking vats--whose natural development has been suspended. One count has these poor frozen souls numbered at 396,526 in the United States alone.

Modern man is not only acting as though he is the lord of life and death. Modern man has now claimed the space between life and death. He has said: "Now limbo will be a cold glitter of souls," packed in liquid nitrogen.

What can be done with the "cold glitter of souls"? The question presents a moral quandary.

Modern man finds himself in this quandary because he has done this even while "under the sign of the cross." Modern man has spurned the teachings of the Church, has spurned the natural moral law. His technological prowess will not be limited by the "inconvenience" of ethics. And it may be that, as a result of his hubris, modern man has painted himself into a moral corner.

The Church herself has asked the question: "With regard to the large number of frozen embryos already in existence the question becomes: what to do with them? Some of those who pose this question do not grasp its ethical nature, motivated as they are by laws in some countries that require cryopreservation centers to empty their storage tanks periodically. Others, however, are aware that a grave injustice has been perpetrated and wonder how best to respond to the duty of resolving it." DP, 19.

Due the respect due to persons, these embryos cannot be allowed to die. They cannot be used for research. They cannot be used as a treatment for infertility. These are all clearly immoral options. Some have suggested a form of "prenatal adoption" as the means out of the moral dilemma. While this last proposal is "praiseworthy with regard to the intention of respecting and defending human life," it still suffers from moral problems that plague the clearly immoral options, though here, the Church's condemnation seems a little softer perhaps in the hope of arriving at some future answer. DP, 19.

But at this time, the Church is perplexed. "All things considered, it needs to be recognized that the thousands of abandoned embryos represent a situation of injustice which in fact cannot be resolved." DP, 19.

The Church cannot give guidance to modern man who has irresponsibly placed himself in a moral quandary. Her theologians are working on it, but so far no clear solution has been found.

With respect to the thousands and thousands of frozen embryos, the Church seems as yet to have found no way out of modern mankind for its sins. By its prior sins, modern mankind has put itself in a moral dilemma. It is wrong to keep these embryos a permanent cryogenic state. It is appears wrong in any manner to dispose of them.

We have put some of our own kind in limbo. A man-made limbo. And with reckless disregard of the rights and dignity of the embryo, we keep condemning more of our kind in the frozen chambers, frozen chambers like a sort of Dantean hell where--can it be so?--

Even Christ's palms, unhealed,
Smart and cannot fish there.

-----

Andrew M. Greenwell is an attorney licensed to practice law in Texas, practicing in Corpus Christi, Texas. He is married with three children. He maintains a blog entirely devoted to the natural law called Lex Christianorum. You can contact Andrew at agreenwell@harris-greenwell.com.
- - -

Pope Benedict XVI's Prayer Intentions for January 2013
General Intention: The Faith of Christians. That in this Year of Faith Christians may deepen their knowledge of the mystery of Christ and witness joyfully to the gift of faith in him.
Missionary Intention: Middle Eastern Christians. That the Christian communities of the Middle East, often discriminated against, may receive from the Holy Spirit the strength of fidelity and perseverance.

Keywords: in vitro fertilization, frozen embryos, limbo, IVF, Gospel of life, dignity of life, embryonic persons, Andrew Greenwell

NEWSLETTERS »

Previous Page 1 | 2

Rate This Article

Was this helpful to you? Very Helpful Somewhat Helpful Not Helpful at All

Would you be interested in more articles like this? Yes, I am Interested No, I am not Interested

Rate Article

1 - 8 of 8 Comments

Mike
10 months ago
I'm not a theologist, but wouldn't the morally best solution be to stop IVF ASAP and then to keep all the frozen embryos in their stasis until such a time as we have the technology to safely unfreeze them all and then to find people willing to have the child? I know that IVF is morally unacceptable, but wouldn't it be acceptable in the interests of saving the life of a child that can only live a life through that method?
Diane
10 months ago
This article clearly brought home to me what a monstrous evil IVF is. Those poor trapped souls. What will God do for some humans who do such horrible things? To leave the soul of your own child trapped like that by your own wilful choice. Such unnatural and perverted evil.
Steve P
10 months ago
This is certainly a sticky situation and something that must be pondered. I'll give my two cents. From the perspective of justice, every child has the right to be conceived within the loving, natural embrace of intercourse between his/her father and mother in the marital bond, as well as to continue natural growth in the womb through birth. Although every child conceived is a gift, to conceive a child outside of this context is a grave moral evil. Likewise, even though these children are already conceived, to "adopt" the embryos via surrogates is not a moral answer, for it is contrary to the dignity of the child to have him/her grow elsewhere other than his/her mother's womb.

What's the solution? As with end of life issues, which the Church teaches it is moral to not have to provide extraordinary measures to try to save a life (such as keeping a person on life-support indefinitely), but it would be acceptable to allow a person to die naturally, it would be morally permissible to allow these embryos to die by simply allowing them to thaw out. We can show utmost respect for their lives by holding public funerals, acknowledging the sacredness of life.

To try for adoption is to affirm embryo surrogacy, which is a grave moral evil. Although there would be great sadness at the loss of these lives, we must work to preserve a consistent ethic of life.
Jeff
10 months ago
To Steve - I am a sinner in need of Christ's mercy, I am not your judge. I answer because you asked, not to condemn you. And admittedly, I have not walked in your shoes.

You said, "So, the question is, did we do the right, moral thing." The answer is no. The Church teaches that IVF is not acceptable. I am aware of no exception to this based on the details of how one goes about IVF or on one's intent as it pertains to IVF.

Through the text of your comment, it seems that you are aware that the Church teaches IVF is unacceptable. That the Church teaches this is enough. It is not necessary that one like the Church's teaching to submit to it.

This article addresses the frozen limbo that these children are subject to. That is terrible, but not the only thing that makes IVF sinful for the participants. There is also the separation of the procreatve and the unitive aspects of the marital act. (I am trying but doubt that I am using the Church's exact wording on this.)

The difficulties and trials of infertility do not relieve one from obeying this teaching. Unfortunately, these difficulties can become a temptation to rationalize a decision against Church teaching.

The GREAT news is that the perfect sacrifice has already been made that we may be forgiven for our sins. If you have not already, go to confession and have this forgiveness dispensed to you. Yes, I am a sinner too and make use of this sacrament myself.

Congratulations on the expansion to your family!
Andrew M. Greenwell
10 months ago
@michael: I agree with your assessment. There are some theologians who argue adoption, but I find the arguments unpersuasive, and I think it would be temerarious and imprudent to act on the personal opinion of a theologian and "adopt" one of these embryos when the Church has clearly reserved ruling and done so in a negative way. Religious submission is to be given to the Church's assessment. To be sure, it is a very deeply troubling matter. It presents a tremendous act of permanent injustice against the frozen embryos. That's why Pope John Paul II begged countries and physicians involved in IVF "that the production of human embryos be halted, taking into account that there seems to be no morally licit solution regarding the human destiny of the thousands and thousands of ‘frozen’ embryos which are and remain the subjects of essential rights and should therefore be protected by law as human persons.” Alas, no one listens.
michael
10 months ago
IVF is intrinsically evil...the Christ, Holy Church, and the natural law tell us so. Whether with Octo-mom or the hard case mentioned in one of the comments, it is still evil. Whatever priest told that good person that it was licit was in serious error and endangered souls in the process. As for the teaching on what to do with frozen embryos, it is fairly obvious. First, they cannot be baptized for in doing this it would kill them in the process. Secondly, they cannot unfrozen and placed in the womb of a woman for that is an intrinsically evil act as well. Adoption of embryos is illicit. Although Holy Church has not come out clearly on this point, the natural law tells us the answer already. Plus, the letter Donum Vitae basically closes the door on any notion of adoption of embryos. We must simply allow these poor embryos to remain in a frozen state.
DLL
10 months ago
Modern man is a manipulator and not the Creator. Clever manipulation is in the name of science,perhaps a mad science,it is deemed to be extraordinary to be able to achieve this incredible technology. Modern man is devising laws to govern the legitimate aspects for the justification for the continuation of any human life,not just the life of an embryo. That is really what healthcare is about as it really means wealth care. The life of one who might become an economic burden can be or will be extinguished ultimately by law. If the creation of and the the maintainence of any embryo for what ever reason is economically lucrative,than so be it,as that is good for the economy. Fetal body parts for sale is good for the profit of some. Conscience matters always seem to yield to economic issues. Economy is the modern religion. Jesus said the one cannot serve God and Mammon. Political correctness is designed to make the abomination morally acceptable and then design laws that protect the abomination as legitimate. Fight against the abomination in good conscience and you will be called a judgemental individual,even by members of ones own family. The civil war is a war about moral values and about what constitute the traditional values that must be preserved to maintain the basic human rights of everyone.
Steve
10 months ago
I will try to summarize our own personal experience with IVF. We had been married almost 3 years when we found out that we had male infertility. But our doctor recommended seeing a fertility specialist. The only option the doctor had for us was IVF. I agonized over using IVF. After discussing it with a priest friend, we decided we would go ahead with it , but only under special circumstanced. My wife would take the hormanal injections, but only 4, no more than that would be used to concieve an embryo. As it turned out, she only had 4 ova that matured and could be used. We truely befieved we could take care of quadruplets if all four eggs did in fact grow. As it turned out though, only one of the fertilized eggs divided and grew, so it was implanted into my wife. Let me say at this time, I was very torn by our situation, consulted our preist freind, and in the end I felt the way we used IVF was proper, although I was completely aware of the Churches teaching.
As it turned out, my wife's HCG level was measured several day later, and it was elevated, which was a good sign she was pregnant. But as time went by the HCG level dropped back to normal wiithin a 1-2 week span. So, if the fertilized egg grew any more after implantation, she actually had an early miscarriage. We of course we quite upset. The IVF doctor had recommended using more eggs, but I did not want any frozen embryos, as you mention in your article, and all the reasons are quite clear to me. We never tried IVF again. But we did adopt four wonder boys and couldn't be happier.
As our priest friend said, the Catholic Church is very supportive of procreation, but it had yet to really deal with infertile couples.
At the time we felt we did the right thing. No frozen embryos resulted, but only at our request. I know these are difficult decisions for married couples, and it obviously works for many. But I could never leave frozen embryos behind,
I really do think our Church should address this more. It is quite devastating when it is determined you are infertile.
So, the question is, did we do the right, moral thing. Certainlly I felt we did at the time. But we realize now that our four sons would never have been a part of our lifes if the IVF had worked. I can't imagine our lifes' without them now.

Comments submitted must be civil, remain on-topic and not violate any laws including copyright. We reserve the right to delete any comments which are abusive, inappropriate or not constructive to the discussion.

Though we invite robust discussion, we reserve the right to not publish any comment which denigrates the human person, undermines marriage and the family, or advocates for positions which openly oppose the teaching of the Catholic Church.

This is a supervised forum and the Editors of Catholic Online retain the right to direct it.

We also reserve the right to block any commenter for repeated violations. Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.

We ask that you NOT post your comment more than once. Catholic Online is growing and our ability to review all comments sometimes results in a delay in their publication.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

Send me important information from Catholic Online and it's partners. See Sample

Post Comment